"“I will not live in the pod,” runs a
mantra on right-wing Twitter. “I will not eat the bugs.” It’s an anathema
against the various corporate and governmental forces that supposedly want us
all to abandon private property, red meat and other American freedoms in favor
of a more sustainable future munching millipedes and living in tiny modular
habitats, all under the benevolent eye of Greta Thunberg and the World Economic
Forum.
The pod/bug refusal, to my mind,
rather overstates the power of degrowthers and one-world panjandrums: You can
find enthusiasm for bug diets and
you’ll-own-nothing-and-be-happy mantras in certain
environmentalist and Euro-socialist circles, but it’s usually more of a mood or
a set of conference talking points than an operational agenda.
But there’s one genuinely powerful
force seeking a more podlike, nutshell-bounded human future. It’s the
technicians of Silicon Valley, backed by billions in digital-age ambition,
who’ll seemingly stop at nothing until human beings live inside their goggles.
The latest example of this ambition
is the Apple Vision Pro, launched with much fanfare and sleek and creepy advertising this week, which
promises an immersive visual experience inside a $3,499 headset. It’s in direct
competition with Facebook turned Meta’s long-running attempts to make its
headset-mediated metaverse happen. And both projects are successors to Google
Glass, which was supposed to be the next big digital thing a decade ago but died a slow death amid
lackluster sales and public derision against the “glasshole” look.
That derision was good, it was
necessary, it was humanist and hopeful and essential. And our health as a
society and species depends on sustaining it, no matter how sleek the goggles
get.
There are two possible futures for
the virtual reality headset. In one, it remains an expensive, niche product
used in specialized ways by hard-core gamers, remote workers looking for an
edge and digital engineers and artists seeking absolute immersion in their
work. In the other, the headset gradually displaces the smartphone as a normal
means of interacting with virtual reality in public and semipublic settings:
Subways are crowded with headset-wearers, spouses sit with his-and-hers
headsets on the couch at night, nursing home common rooms are filled with
seniors lost in V.R.-mediated memories, teenagers hang out headsetted in
basements or (more likely) just “hang out” virtually from the safety of their
own bedrooms, showing up as avatars inside one another’s goggles.
Obviously, Apple, Meta and Google
are all invested in the second future. The big money in Silicon Valley comes
from controlling crucial platforms and getting other companies to pay for the
privilege of having their programs or apps allowed inside, and if enough people
migrate to the metaverse then the winner of the headset wars will be the king
of infinite money as well as infinite virtual space. So the clear goal of this
competition is a future where the Vision Pro or the next Meta headset or some
other competitor locks down an iPhone-level market, not just a boutique
clientele.
That’s presumably why Apple designed
its headset to show users’ eyes
to people around them — so that you can imagine yourself to be still engaging
socially while you’re goggling. It’s why Mark Zuckerberg, in response to the
Apple launch, told Meta employees that he wanted their headsets to stay cheaper
and their users to be “active and doing things” while goggling, not just
sitting on a couch. The rival firms clearly want people to integrate their
headsets into everyday existence, the way we’ve already integrated our laptops,
tablets and phones.
Unfortunately, that rational
commercial goal is in deep tension with the flourishing of the human race. Back
when Google Glass debuted, one could already foresee where
the augmented or virtual reality experience would take humanity — toward
deepened isolation, depressive solipsism, masturbatory anomie. Now we have much
more evidence that the less immersive virtual reality created by smartphones
and social media is toxic in large doses — to children and adolescents especially,
but to the rest of us to some degree as well.
Of course, you can construct a case
where actually the more immersive world of headset life will be
healthier than the half-real world of screens and swipes and posting. Or you
can take a Singularitarian stance and argue that all future human progress will
take place in virtual universes, so let’s start the leap right now. The digital
revolution hasn’t failed to deliver the promised utopia, you can say; the
revolution just hasn’t been completed.
Here, just slip on these goggles …
Against these blandishments, the
best defense is still the social contempt that greeted Google Glass, mixed
perhaps with some of the fatigue with face coverings that eventually turned all
but the most committed Covidians against masking. Thou shalt not hide the
human face isn’t an absolute command, but it should be a general
expectation, and the scenes in the Vision Pro introduction video where the
laughing dad watches his kids play through his goggles to better film them for
a rewind performance later should never lose their antisocial and dystopian
vibes.
This is not a rejection of
technological progress. It’s a rejection of the social regress and
dehumanization that comes when we let technology master us instead of the other
way around.
No matter how we respond to them,
the headsets will not go away, and a general social stigma against their use as
everyday devices will not stand in the way of them benefiting certain people in
certain circumstances.
So let those benefits be discovered
by the few. But for the many, facing the disappearance of the human face into a
goggled imaginarium, it’s important to nurture the feelings that have kept the
headset market limited so far, and to appreciate the warning that they’re
giving us.
Some internet-age technologies offer
glamour at first and only reveal their dark side over time. But this wolf comes
as a wolf."
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą